This is in response to your message about removing the overloading of list
operations in ``Questions on the Table''---actually it more in response to the
message about removing monad comprehension. I'm pretty new to Haskell (and
functional programming in general), but my understanding is that the existing
system is precisely the structure required to make comprehension notation
work, so why would the notation be weakened to just Lists?
Regarding the overloading of operators, your not talking about changing the
structure of the classes, just the function names? i.e. you said map should
mean lists and mapM (or something) should mean a general Monads?
Also, of the two problems that you mentioned, the first is an error reporting
problem (At worst the compiler could give a note about what the error message
would mean for lists) and the second could be solved with some sort of type
declaration couldn't it?
Again, I'm pretty new to this sort of thing---i'm an undergrad.
On a different note, can someone point me to literature describing the
use of combinators as byte-code or machine-code. I guess that would mean
normal forms for which there are fast algorithms to do partial application
and composition. (actually, a good book on combinators would would help a
lot)
Jeff
